Say what you will about your favorite caliber, but these studies shows that in a gun fight, the caliber of the gun played no statistically relevant part.

HUH??? These "studies" only show that they did not address caliber.

If you saw a "study" that showed that 20% of people who fall out of windows die, would you conclude that the "study" proves that the height of the fall "plays no statistically relevant part"? It doesn't matter whether you fall out a window in your one-story house or an 87th floor apartment? After all, the "study' doesn't mention the height of the fall.

Adhering to the very first rule of a gun fight; do not participate in one, solves these trivial pursuits of meaningless debate.

But if you couldn't, at that moment what would you rather count on for the highest percentage chance of a one shot stop?

Now, there are many good arguments against a probable one shot stop, and I agree you cannot take that for granted, however, there is also good arguments that show that it's very possible you may only have time to get off one shot.

If someone is shooting a .32 acp at someone, and that someone is shooting back with say, 9mm on up, I'll put my $ on the shooter spraying 9mm, as long as they are both making hits.
Unless I am misunderstanding the example.

definatly need more data. that said there have been a couple account that i know of when someone was trying to protect themselves with a .22. after 4 shots at 5ft to the chest the BG was still able to assault the victim, steal their car, and make it a lil ways down the road untill the police caught them. they survived their wounds a to spend sometime in the concrete hotel. ive heard of this happening atleast 3 times. so caliber is for sure relevant, maybe even before shot placement. then again i probably wouldnt keep attacking someone if they had just shot me 1 or 2 times in the face or neck, and try to just get out of their. so IMO shot placement and caliber COULD be equally important.

From what I've seen when an officer is killed in a gun fight, the BG almost always gets the critical hits in within those first several rounds fired. They are head shots, neck shots, a shot to an area which causes the officer to be incapacitated allowing the BG to walk up and finish the officer. They also get lucky hits like those that penetrate the side of the officers vest or underneath the arm pit.

The BG is usually more aggressive and have no force policy to abide by.

They also damn near always get the first shot off, which seems to be very important factor in shooting deaths of officers.

An officer is most always on the reaction side of a situation. The suspect always has the initiative. This makes a big difference.

As the whole of the statement is not accurate, I would disagree with it. There are far too many folks who are dead that were part of an officer involved shooting where they either were not armed or never had a firearm in their hand when they were shot. So they did not initiate and the officer if he was being reactive at all to seeing a firearm, over reacted.

As far as the topic of this thread goes, I would agree that Caliber as well as type of bullet is very critical to the outcome. A .45 FMJ might end up being a through and through in a non-critical location (like upper right shoulder) where a .357Mag JHP hitting the same location might fully incapacitate due to the extreme damage it could cause.

Haha I was thinking that when I first saw this thread. Was waiting for some possible follow up data and sources to be cited but I guess we are not getting that?

Yeah yeah yeah If 2 men are shooting at each other and one has x caliber and one has y caliber and y caliber misses and x caliber hits I think it's safe to say that x caliber wins? Kind of a stupid thread but whatever...but yes all calibers are deadly so on and so forth. Carry what you like OP and don't feel like you have to justify it, we all carry what we want.